Course Management System’s Compatibility with Teaching Style Influences Willingness to Complete Training

Audrey Smith Pereira, Monika Maya Wahi

Abstract


Although course management systems (CMSs) provide technology platforms that help faculty members adopt better techniques for teaching and learning, and training contributes to faculty information technology (IT) use, many higher education faculty members do not complete CMS training programs, resulting in underuse of CMSs. Therefore, the overall purpose of this research was to address how instructor perceptions influence willingness to complete IT training on CMSs, and to discern techniques university administrators can implement to improve training completion rates and, ultimately, CMS adoption rates. The basic design of the study was a cross-sectional survey. Data were obtained from 102 public university faculty members who responded to an anonymous, web-based survey about their perceptions of the relative advantage, compatibility, complexity, trialability, and observability of their institution’s CMS. The data were analyzed using multiple linear regression models. Compatibility, defined as the degree to which instructors perceive the CMS as being consistent with their existing values, past experiences, and current or future teaching needs, was statistically significantly associated with willingness to complete online and in-person CMS training after controlling for other factors. Major findings suggest that faculty training on the CMS is not “one size fits all.” If greater use of CMSs by faculty is to be achieved, university administrators should consider compatibility of teaching style with CMS adoption when developing and promoting CMS training.

Keywords


Higher Education Faculty Members; Course Management System; Technology Adoption; Educational Technology; Faculty Training and Development; Diffusion of Innovation Theory

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abrahams, D. A. (2010). Technology adoption in higher education: A framework for identifying and prioritising issues and barriers to adoption of instructional technology. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 2(2), 34—49. doi:10.1108/17581184201000012

Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2012). Digital faculty: Professors, teaching and technology, 2012. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://www.babson.edu/Academics/faculty/provost/Pages/babson-survey-research-group.aspx

Al-Senaidi, S., Lin, L., & Poirot, J. (2009). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning in Oman. Computers & Education, 53(3), 575—590. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.03.015

Archambault, L., Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Williams, M. K. (2010). Professional development 2.0: Transforming teacher education pedagogy with 21st century tools. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(1), 4—11. doi:10.1080/21532974.2010.10784651

Aremu, A., Fakolujo, O., & Oluleye, A. (2013). Designing and Developing e-content in higher education: The University of Ibadan model. In Unlocking the potential of ICT in higher education: Case studies of educational technology initiatives at African universities (pp. 76—88). Johannesburg, South Africa: South African Institute for Distance Education. Retrieved from http://www.saide.org.za/

Bennett, J., & Bennett, L. (2003). A review of factors that influence the diffusion of innovation when structuring a faculty training program. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 53—63. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00161-6

Bothma, C. H., & Cant, M. C. (2011). Adopting learning technologies: From belief to practice. Educational Studies, 37(4), 375—389. doi:10.1080/03055698.2010.511697

Calderon, O., Ginsberg, A. P., Ciabocchi, L., Calderon, O., Ginsberg, A. P., & Ciabocchi, L. (2012). Multidimensional assessment of pilot blended learning programs: Maximizing program effectiveness based on student and faculty feedback. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(4), 23—37. doi:http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln_main

Carril, P. C. M., Sanmamed, M. G., & Sellés, N. H. (2013). Pedagogical roles and competencies of university teachers practicing in the e-learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(3), 462—487. doi:http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl

Chen, J. C., Ellis, M., Lockhart, J., Hamoush, S., Brawner, C. E., & Tront, J. G. (2000). Technology in engineering education: What do the faculty know and want? Journal of Engineering Education, 89(3), 279—283. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2000.tb00526.x

Chitiyo, R., & Harmon, S. W. (2009). An analysis of the integration of instructional technology in pre-service teacher education in Zimbabwe. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(6), 807—830. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9136-7

deNoyelles, A., Cobb, C., & Lowe, D. (2012). Influence of reduced seat time on satisfaction and perception of course development goals: A case study in faculty development. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(2), 85—98. doi:http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln_main

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255—284. doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551

Goktas, Y., Yildirim, S., & Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main barriers and possible enablers of ICTs integration into pre-service teacher education programs. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 193—204. doi:http://www.ifets.info/

Green, K. C. (2010). The 2010 campus computing survey. Retrieved from http://www.campuscomputing.net/survey

Hassan, S. S. (2011). The needs and perceptions of academics regarding their professional development in an era of educational transformation. South African Journal of Higher Education, 25(3), 476—490. doi:http://jolt.merlot.org/

Hicks, S. D. (2011). Technology in today’s classroom: Are you a tech-savvy teacher? Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 84(5), 188—191. doi:http://journalseek.net/cgi-bin/journalseek/journalsearch.cgi?field=issn&query=0009-8655

Hurtado, S., Eagan, K., Pryor, J. H., Whang, H., & Tran, S. (2012). Undergraduate teaching faculty: The 2010-2011 HERI faculty survey. University of California, Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute. Retrieved from http://www.heri.ucla.edu/

Iorio, J., Kee, K., & Decker, M. (2012). Instructional technology training: Developing functional and applied skill sets. In Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1188—1193). Chesapeake, VA. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/39740/

Keengwe, J., Kidd, T., & Kyei-Blankson, L. (2009). Faculty and technology: Implications for faculty training and technology leadership. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 23—28. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9126-2

Keesee, G. S. (2010). A perceived attributes and organizational support influencing course management system adopter status in historically black colleges and universities (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest, UMI Dissertations Publishing. (Order No. 3426608).

Keesee, G. S., & Shepard, M. (2011). Perceived attributes predict course management system adopter status. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 14(1). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/

Kidd, T. T. (2010). Butterfly under a pin: Exploring the voices and stories told of faculty who adopt ICT’s for teaching and learning practices. Education and Information Technologies, 15(3), 155—170. doi:10.1007/s10639-009-9102-3

Kinuthia, W. (2005). Planning faculty development for successful implementation of web-based instruction. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 22(4), 189—200. doi:10.1108/10650740510617502

Korr, J., Derwin, E. B., Greene, K., & Sokoloff, W. (2012). Transitioning an adult-serving university to a blended learning model. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60(1), 2—11. doi:10.1080/07377363.2012.649123

Mallinson, B., & Krull, G. (2013). An investigation of the deployment of the Moodle virtual learning environment at eight African universities. In Unlocking the potential of ICT in higher education: Case studies of educational technology initiatives at African universities (pp. 30—45). Johannesburg, South Africa: South African Institute for Distance Education. Retrieved from http://www.saide.org.za/

Mark, K., Thadani, D. R., Santandreu Calonge, D., Pun, C. F. K., & Chiu, P. H. P. (2011). From neophyte to experienced facilitator: An interactive blended-learning course for graduate teaching assistants in Hong Kong. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International Journal, 3(2), 153—169. doi:http://www.kmel-journal.org/ojs/index.php/online-publication

Masalela, R. K. (2009). Potential benefits and complexities of blended learning in higher education: The case of the University of Botswana. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 10(1), 66. doi:http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/

McBride, R., & Thompson, A. (2011). Using Moodle Academy to prepare technical college faculty for online teaching: An evaluation model. In Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 513—518). Chesapeake, VA. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/36320/

McKissic, S. C. (2012). Examining transformative faculty development factors to advance technology adoption and diffusion at a campus-based institution. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing. (Order No. 3095210)

Meyer, K. A. (2014). An analysis of the cost and cost-effectiveness of faculty development for online teaching. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 18(1). Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln_main

Newhouse, R., Buckley, K. M., Grant, M., & Idzik, S. (2013). Reconceptualization of a doctoral EBP course from in-class to blended format: lessons learned from a successful transition. Journal of Professional Nursing, 29(4), 225—232. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2012.05.019

Onyia, C. R., & Onyia, M. (2011). Faculty perception for technology integration in Nigeria university system: Implications for faculty quality curriculum design. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(1), 81—92. doi:http://www.ijbssnet.com/

Author, A. A. (2015). Faculty willingness to complete information technology training on course management systems (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest, UMI Dissertation Publishing. (Order No. 3700990).

Porter, G. (2011). Specifics of course management system benefits for new university faculty. Higher Education Studies, 1(2), 2—7. doi:10.5539/hes.v1n2p2

Potter, S. L., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2012). Technology integration for instructional improvement: The impact of professional development. Performance Improvement, 51(2), 22—27. doi:10.1002/pfi.21246

Rocca, S. J. (2010). Determining the professional development needs of faculty in a college of agriculture. College Student Journal, 54(1), 69—75. doi:http://www.projectinnovation.biz/csj.html

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.

Roman, T., Kelsey, K., & Lin, H. (2010). Enhancing online education through instructor skill development in higher education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/

Samarawickrema, G., & Stacey, E. (2007). Adopting webâ€based learning and teaching: A case study in higher education. Distance Education, 28(3), 313—333. doi:10.1080/01587910701611344

Sandford, B. A., Dainty, J. D., Belcher, G. G., & Frisbee, R. L. (2011). Perceptions of the willingness of part-time instructors in community colleges in the US to engage in professional development opportunities and the best method(s) of delivering these experiences. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 26(1), 48—61. doi:http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JCTE/

Simon, D., Jackson, K., & Maxwell, K. (2013). Traditional vs. online instruction: Faculty resources impact strategies for course delivery. Business Education & Accreditation, 5(1), 107—116. doi:http://www.theibfr.com/bea.htm

Smolin, L., & Lawless, K. A. (2011). Evaluation across contexts: Evaluating the impact of technology integration professional development partnerships. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(3), 92—98. doi:10.1080/21532974.2011.10784663

SPSS. (n.d.). IBM SPSS statistics. Retrieved from http://www-01.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/products/statistics/

SurveyMonkey. (2015). Create surveys, get answers. Retrieved from https://www.surveymonkey.com

Tsai, Y., & Talley, P. C. (2013). The effect of a course management system (CMS)-supported strategy instruction on EFL reading comprehension and strategy use. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1—17. doi:10.1080/09588221.2012.757754

Unal, Z., & Unal, A. (2011). Evaluating and comparing the usability of web-based course management systems. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 10(1), 19—38. doi:http://www.informingscience.us/icarus/journals/jiteresearch

Unwin, T., Kleessen, B., Hollow, D., Williams, J. B., Oloo, L. M., Alwala, J., … Muianga, X. (2010). Digital learning management systems in Africa: Myths and realities. Open Learning, 25(1), 5—23. doi:10.1080/02680510903482033

West, R., Waddoups, G., & Graham, C. (2007). Understanding the experiences of instructors as they adopt a course management system. Educational Technology Research & Development, 55(1), 1—26. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9018-1

Yidana, I., Sarfo, F. K., Edwards, A. K., Boison, R., & Wilson, O. A. (2013). Using the Moodle learning management system for teaching and learning at the University of Education, Winneba. In Unlocking the potential of ICT in higher education: Case studies of educational technology initiatives at African universities (pp. 58—75). Johannesburg, South Africa: South African Institute for Distance Education. Retrieved from http://www.saide.org.za/

Yohon, T., & Zimmerman, D. (2006). An exploratory study of adoption of software and hardware by faculty in the liberal arts and sciences. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 36(1), 9—27. doi:10.2190/8QGV-RYXQ-VY7Q-5RJT




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24059/olj.v21i1.763